Postseason Scoreboard watching....

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by Wonderful Monds

From Rule 2.00

"When it seems apparent that a batted ball will be an Infield Fly, the umpire shall immediately declare “Infield Fly” for the benefit of the runners. If the ball is near the baselines, the umpire shall declare “Infield Fly, if Fair.” "

Notice the rule doesn't say that it has to be apparent immediately. Don't conflate the two things. Being apparent immediately and immediately calling it when it's apparent are not one in the same. The umpire did not call it until it was apparent Kozma could get to it with ordinary effort. Considering he stopped at the spot where the ball eventually dropped, it was an ordinary play. But the umpired had to wait to be sure of that.

[The Operator]

I can't believe Jim Thome is still around.

[Wonderful Monds]

Originally Posted by Brutus

Notice the rule doesn't say that it has to be apparent immediately. Don't conflate the two things.

Now you're being obtuse.

That's how the rule is always called, because that's the nature of the infield fly.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by Wonderful Monds

Now you're being obtuse.

That's how the rule is always called, because that's the nature of the infield fly.

Surely you can discuss this maturely without resorting to attacks.

[Dom Heffner]

Originally Posted by Wonderful Monds

From Rule 2.00

"When it seems apparent that a batted ball will be an Infield Fly, the umpire shall immediately declare “Infield Fly” for the benefit of the runners. If the ball is near the baselines, the umpire shall declare “Infield Fly, if Fair.” "

You think? Under Brutus' argument the umpire should wait to see if its routune. Which sort of means it isnt routine, if you have to wait.

[BuckeyeRed27]

I've umpired a lot and while you want to wait long enough to be sure of where the ball is, IMO he called that way way too late. I think you could make an argument for ordinary effort there, but his timing was off.

[edabbs44]

Originally Posted by Brutus

Notice the rule doesn't say that it has to be apparent immediately. Don't conflate the two things. Being apparent immediately and immediately calling it when it's apparent are not one in the same. The umpire did not call it until it was apparent Kozma could get to it with ordinary effort. Considering he stopped at the spot where the ball eventually dropped, it was an ordinary play. But the umpired had to wait to be sure of that.

If Kozma was able to catch it with "ordinary" effort, I don't think the ump would have needed that much time to call IF.

Interesting, I remember Kozma as being a potential Cincy draft pick a few years back.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by Dom Heffner

You think? Under Brutus' argument the umpire should wait to see if its routune. Which sort of means it isnt routine, if you have to wait.

He never had to sprint to get to the ball. That's an ordinary effort. The umpire is taught to simply wait to make sure the ball continues to hang up as long as it takes for the player to make a play on it.

I took several umpiring classes in my 10 years of umpiring. Legion ball, which I did a lot of, uses major league rules. He absolutely 100% did exactly as everything I've ever been taught in training.

[Wonderful Monds]

Originally Posted by Brutus

Surely you can discuss this maturely without resorting to attacks.

I'm not trying to attack, I'm sorry. I just think I'm debating a contrarian opinion here.

It's pretty clear the rule was misapplied. It's called immediately because the nature of any ball off the bat that should be an infield fly will be immediately clear as an infield fly.

If you have to wait on it and judge it, so do the fielders, meaning it's no longer a routine pop out.

[mattfeet]

I just watched the replay on MLB.com again - Kozma was never once under the spot where the ball landed. The ball land 2 steps behind him and a step to his left. That from the furthest spot that Kozma traveled to, NOT where he ended up.

That said, IMO, this was not the right call. Kozma had yet to reach the spot where the ball landed before he bailed on it. Could he have made the catch? Probably. Would it have been easy? Not really.

-Matt

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by Wonderful Monds

I'm not trying to attack, I'm sorry. I just think I'm debating a contrarian opinion here.

It's pretty clear the rule was misapplied. It's called immediately because the nature of any ball off the bat that should be an infield fly will be immediately clear as an infield fly.

If you have to wait on it and judge it, so do the fielders, meaning it's no longer a routine pop out.

No you're debating someone who umpired for several years. I'm not being a contrarian, I'm speaking from experience. That's the rule and he did exactly as he's taught to do. You say it was "pretty clear" that it was misapplied, but what formal training to you have to know this? I promise you 100% that he did exactly as I was taught to do in my training. That's what umpires are taught to do on that call. No offense, but I don't know how someone can say it was clearly misapplied when they initially didn't know that the ball didn't have to be on the infield to be an infield fly. Your initial statement was that "how can a ball dropping in the outfield be an infield fly rule?"

It doesn't have to be obvious as soon as the ball is hit. If the infielder doesn't have to sprint to the ball, it's generally considered ordinary effort. And if the ball hangs up long enough for an infielder that is back pedaling or jogging, that's usually considered an infield fly when the umpire deems the infielder is going to be able to make a play on the ball.

[dougdirt]

Protest denied by MLB.

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by mattfeet

I just watched the replay on MLB.com again - Kozma was never once under the spot where the ball landed. The ball land 2 steps behind him and a step to his left. That from the furthest spot that Kozma traveled to, NOT where he ended up.

That said, IMO, this was not the right call. Kozma had yet to reach the spot where the ball landed before he bailed on it. Could he have made the catch? Probably. Would it have been easy? Not really.

-Matt

He was at most a step away from where it landed and he bailed out probably 2-3 seconds before it fell.

[mattfeet]

So what you're saying is, in contrast to your previous statements, that Kozma was not once directly underneath where the ball finally landed?

[Brutus]

Originally Posted by mattfeet

So what you're saying is, in contrast to your previous statements, that Kozma was not once directly underneath where the ball finally landed?

I said at most. And that's debatable. I still stand by the belief he was in the spot where it was landed, but there's no way to prove that so we're just merely arguing semantics at this point.